Hey folks --
Like last time 'round, if you'd like to express an opinion about
features for Django 1.2, go and vote:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtIlKMKDxMBpdGVPVXlTODVLeTBpNkdLd3hqZzdYR3c&hl=en
I've reorganized the 1.2 feature list
(http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Version1.2Featu
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>
> Hey folks --
>
> Like last time 'round, if you'd like to express an opinion about
> features for Django 1.2, go and vote:
>
>
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtIlKMKDxMBpdGVPVXlTODVLeTBpNkdLd3hqZzdYR3c&hl=en
>
> I've reorgani
Hi Jacob,
Could you please add "Add Alex's django-filters
(http://github.com/alex/django-filter) instead of admin filters and
#5833 Custom FilterSpecs proposal" feature idea into your google
spreadsheets doc and vote for it.
I was "late to the party" when you told you're going to vote on
features
Jacob,
yeah, found django-filters mentioned few times at Admin-02 notes.
Ok, nice, idea isn't abandoned.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Yuri Baburov wrote:
> Hi Jacob,
>
> Could you please add "Add Alex's django-filters
> (http://github.com/alex/django-filter) instead of admin filters and
> #
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=txJx3_oLeRwrk8SwnoWc88w
Column X
On Oct 13, 6:38 am, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Hey folks --
>
> Like last time 'round, if you'd like to express an opinion about
> features for Django 1.2, go and vote:
>
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtIlKMKDxM
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
...
> A +1 from a non-committer is an offer to personally work on the feature,
> or to help the person working on it by reviewing the patch, testing, etc.
Holy smokes, there are gonna be some busy people. :)
--~--~-~--~---
Two apps I would like to see in contrib are:
mptt - this has been stable for a long time, integrates well into
django, and is now a dependency for a few apps out there
django-registration - rewritten to have pluggable work flow, this is a
fundamental feature of so many web sites
Phillip.
--~--~-
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Phillip Temple
wrote:
> django-registration - rewritten to have pluggable work flow, this is a
> fundamental feature of so many web sites
I'm -1 on adding django-registration to contrib.
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of c
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:30 PM, James Bennett wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Phillip Temple
> wrote:
>> django-registration - rewritten to have pluggable work flow, this is a
>> fundamental feature of so many web sites
>
> I'm -1 on adding django-registration to contrib.
Agreed.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Phillip Temple
wrote:
>
> Two apps I would like to see in contrib are:
> mptt - this has been stable for a long time, integrates well into
> django, and is now a dependency for a few apps out there
> django-registration - rewritten to have pluggable work flow, th
The only reason I will migrate to 1.2 is if you include schema
migration. It is that important for us (we have a lot of production
code out). Anyway, why did we pick south instead of django-evolution ?
I'm +1 (+1 +1) for any db schema migration.
I'm +1 for admin ui branch integration. Django stan
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:12 AM, rjc wrote:
> The only reason I will migrate to 1.2 is if you include schema
> migration. It is that important for us (we have a lot of production
> code out). Anyway, why did we pick south instead of django-evolution ?
> I'm +1 (+1 +1) for any db schema migration.
Schema migration is not an option, it is required for any production
code (we ship
a lot of code to out customer's site and regularly publish patches
that include schema
changes). You cannot make a site without ORM or schema migration, I
see both at the
same level.
BTW, we use django evolution si
On Saturday 24 October 2009 14:32:58 rjc wrote:
> Schema migration is not an option, it is required for any
> production code (we ship
> a lot of code to out customer's site and regularly publish patches
> that include schema
> changes). You cannot make a site without ORM or schema migration, I
>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 9:32 AM, rjc wrote:
> BTW, we use django evolution since south doesn't support python 2.3
> (again a lot of
> enterprise code is stuck at RHEL4 which is py2.3)
It sounds to me like you already have a solution and some special
needs that make the current choice you have in
Support for non-relational databases (AppEngine, #10192) +1
See
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/fcf501d073ae33f
for reference.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:53 AM, kugutsumen wrote:
> Support for non-relational databases (AppEngine, #10192) +1
Repeating once again: the voting's over and done with. The proposals
have been assigned their priorities. Time to move on.
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- th
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 7:42 AM, James Bennett wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 6:53 AM, kugutsumen wrote:
>> Support for non-relational databases (AppEngine, #10192) +1
>
> Repeating once again: the voting's over and done with. The proposals
> have been assigned their priorities. Time to move
18 matches
Mail list logo
